Jaimy A. Simmering PhD , Deborah A. Zagers MSc , Robert H. Geelkerken PhD , Henny Kuipers BSc , Gerben A. te Riet o.g. Scholten MSc , Michel M.P.J. Reijnen PhD , Cornelis H. Slump PhD
{"title":"心电图门控计算机断层扫描重建心脏8期或10期对主动脉支架移植心脏搏动诱导运动量化的影响","authors":"Jaimy A. Simmering PhD , Deborah A. Zagers MSc , Robert H. Geelkerken PhD , Henny Kuipers BSc , Gerben A. te Riet o.g. Scholten MSc , Michel M.P.J. Reijnen PhD , Cornelis H. Slump PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jvssci.2023.100131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The goal of this study was to determine to what extent aortic stent graft motion quantification is comparable between electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated computed tomography (CT) scans with reconstructions into 8 and 10 cardiac phases on CT scanners from two different vendors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An experimental setup that induces motion of an aortic stent graft, according to a predefined aortic blood pressure wave, was placed in two CT scanners of different vendors. The stent graft motion was captured using an ECG-gated CT technique and quantified using dedicated analysis algorithms. The calculated motion amplitudes and total traveled path lengths of stent segmentations were compared between scans reconstructed into 8 and 10 phases and between the scanners, after validation with sensor measurements and repeated measurements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>No difference in motion amplitudes in z-direction (craniocaudal direction) was observed between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases (0.02 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.01 to 0.05 mm; <em>P</em> = .358). The z-amplitudes differed by 0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm; <em>P</em> = .003) between the different CT scanners. Path lengths differed 0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01-to 0.13 mm; <em>P</em> = .013) between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases and 0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm; <em>P</em> < .001) between the different scanners.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The motion amplitudes can accurately be compared between 8 and 10 phases and between the two scanners, without differences larger than the voxel size of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm. Clinical motion analysis results of different ECG-gated CT scans and CT scanners can be compared up to the accuracy of the CT scan.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74035,"journal":{"name":"JVS-vascular science","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354/pdfft?md5=436e7fbbab4cd50b922f2bef3645a308&pid=1-s2.0-S2666350323000354-main.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The influence of electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography reconstruction into 8 or 10 cardiac phases on cardiac-pulsatility-induced motion quantification of stent grafts in the aorta\",\"authors\":\"Jaimy A. Simmering PhD , Deborah A. Zagers MSc , Robert H. Geelkerken PhD , Henny Kuipers BSc , Gerben A. te Riet o.g. Scholten MSc , Michel M.P.J. Reijnen PhD , Cornelis H. Slump PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jvssci.2023.100131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The goal of this study was to determine to what extent aortic stent graft motion quantification is comparable between electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated computed tomography (CT) scans with reconstructions into 8 and 10 cardiac phases on CT scanners from two different vendors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An experimental setup that induces motion of an aortic stent graft, according to a predefined aortic blood pressure wave, was placed in two CT scanners of different vendors. The stent graft motion was captured using an ECG-gated CT technique and quantified using dedicated analysis algorithms. The calculated motion amplitudes and total traveled path lengths of stent segmentations were compared between scans reconstructed into 8 and 10 phases and between the scanners, after validation with sensor measurements and repeated measurements.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>No difference in motion amplitudes in z-direction (craniocaudal direction) was observed between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases (0.02 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.01 to 0.05 mm; <em>P</em> = .358). The z-amplitudes differed by 0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm; <em>P</em> = .003) between the different CT scanners. Path lengths differed 0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01-to 0.13 mm; <em>P</em> = .013) between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases and 0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm; <em>P</em> < .001) between the different scanners.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The motion amplitudes can accurately be compared between 8 and 10 phases and between the two scanners, without differences larger than the voxel size of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm. Clinical motion analysis results of different ECG-gated CT scans and CT scanners can be compared up to the accuracy of the CT scan.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JVS-vascular science\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354/pdfft?md5=436e7fbbab4cd50b922f2bef3645a308&pid=1-s2.0-S2666350323000354-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JVS-vascular science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JVS-vascular science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666350323000354","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
The influence of electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography reconstruction into 8 or 10 cardiac phases on cardiac-pulsatility-induced motion quantification of stent grafts in the aorta
Objective
The goal of this study was to determine to what extent aortic stent graft motion quantification is comparable between electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated computed tomography (CT) scans with reconstructions into 8 and 10 cardiac phases on CT scanners from two different vendors.
Methods
An experimental setup that induces motion of an aortic stent graft, according to a predefined aortic blood pressure wave, was placed in two CT scanners of different vendors. The stent graft motion was captured using an ECG-gated CT technique and quantified using dedicated analysis algorithms. The calculated motion amplitudes and total traveled path lengths of stent segmentations were compared between scans reconstructed into 8 and 10 phases and between the scanners, after validation with sensor measurements and repeated measurements.
Results
No difference in motion amplitudes in z-direction (craniocaudal direction) was observed between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases (0.02 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], –0.01 to 0.05 mm; P = .358). The z-amplitudes differed by 0.04 mm (95% CI, 0.01-0.07 mm; P = .003) between the different CT scanners. Path lengths differed 0.07 mm (95% CI, 0.01-to 0.13 mm; P = .013) between the reconstructions into 8 and 10 phases and 0.13 mm (95% CI, 0.06-0.17 mm; P < .001) between the different scanners.
Conclusions
The motion amplitudes can accurately be compared between 8 and 10 phases and between the two scanners, without differences larger than the voxel size of 0.3 × 0.3 × 0.5 mm. Clinical motion analysis results of different ECG-gated CT scans and CT scanners can be compared up to the accuracy of the CT scan.